MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982965544 · doi:10.1080/00140130210159995

The e<sup>ff</sup>ect of hyperoxia on submaximal exercise with the self-contained breathing apparatus

2002· article· en· W1982965544 on OpenAlexafffund
Neil D. Eves, Stewart R. Petersen, Richard L. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueErgonomics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsHyperoxiaHeart rateVentilation (architecture)MedicineCardiologyPhysical therapyBreathingRespirationWork of breathingAnesthesiaBlood pressureInternal medicineRespiratory systemLungPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of hyperoxia on submaximal exercise with the self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) were studied in 25 males. Each participant completed a graded exercise test for the determination of ventilatory threshold (VT) and then a submaximal practice trial with a normoxic gas mixture. The normoxic (20.93 +/- 0.22% O(2); SUB(21)) and hyperoxic (40.18 +/- 0.73% O(2); SUB(40)) submaximal trials were then administered in a random order. All exercise tests were completed on separate days while wearing firefighting gear and the SCBA. Compared with SUB(21), hyperoxia significantly reduced minute ventilation (V(E)), mask pressure (P(mask)), heart rate, blood lactate concentration, perceived exertion, and perceived breathing distress. As expected, hemoglobin saturation remained higher (p < 0.05) during SUB(40). The reductions in both V(E) and P(mask) with hyperoxia imply a reduction in the work of breathing during exercise. Total gas consumption was 10.3 +/- 8.1% lower during SUB(40) when compared to SUB(21), another finding that has significant practical implications for occupational safety.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueErgonomicsSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207